Editorials / Opinion

U.S. Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers’ guest column in the Seattle Times ["Obama’s regulatory cap-and-trade does not work for Washington state," Opinion, July 2] is a good review of hydropower, but not of climate change. McMorris Rodgers complains that the Environmental Protection Agency’s rules on power plants could “cause Washington families to see higher energy…

Four U.S. environmental administrators from the Environmental Protection Agency are “convinced by the overwhelming verdict of scientists that the Earth (is) warming and that we humans (are) the only controllable contributor to this phenomenon,” and “that there is no legitimate debate over man’s contribution” [“Ex-EPA chiefs: Time to act on climate change”, Nation & World,…

We can’t afford inaction

Carbon dioxide is a major contributor to climate change. which affects weather, including superstorms, droughts and wildfires ["Obama’s coal plan catches up with climate policy in Olympia," Opinion, June 4]. We, in Washington state, are vulnerable to all of these effects. The EPA regulation of power plants is a major effort to address climate change because power plants are among the largest sources of carbon pollution.

Because emissions of carbon dioxide are “free” under current economic systems, they have been dumping unlimited carbon pollution without regard to the costs. Washington is starting to address this issue by shutting down coal burning at the Centralia power plant.

But we cannot address it alone. We also receive coal-generated electricity from Montana, and addressing climate change requires a nationwide control of carbon emissions.

Costs of inaction are not something that Washington can afford. Impacts such as forest fires and acidification of the ocean are already costly, and the snowpack will likely decline to the point that agriculture will be severely affected.

William McPherson, Seattle

China and India will continue to pollute

President Obama’s proposed EPA coal power plant reduction policies are

Many, many thanks are due to President Obama for having the courage to propose new rules limiting carbon emissions from U.S. power plants [“Obama’s coal plan catches up with climate policy in Olympia,” Opinion, June 4]. When Congress does little or nothing about climate change, at least our president takes action. Emissions from power…

The Seattle Times recently published a story on how U.S. Rep. Steve Daines, R-Mont., was upset that Washington Gov. Jay Inslee passed an executive order to lessen greenhouse gas emissions [“Montana lawmaker criticizes Washington’s coal-power plan,” Local News, May 12]. This would hurt Montana and Wyoming’s economy because 13 percent of Washington’s energy…

Jerry Large’s column is an inspiration for all of us with means to divest our 401(k)s, pensions, savings, etc., from any company that is a primary producer of fossil fuels and invest more in clean and green energy [“UW students keep pressure on divestment for climate change,” Local News, May 14]. The boomer generation…

Steaming water, discharged from a coal-to-gas plant in Inner Mongolia, spreads out over the landscape. (Courtesy of Zhu Ye / Special to The Seattle Times)

I am writing in response to the article in The Times “China’s coal plants guzzle scarce water” [News, May 4]. The article states, “When operating at full capacity, the Datang International plant will require more than 7 billion gallons of water each year.” Any outrage expressed by our country toward China for this water waste is drastically misplaced.

Our country’s own fracking industry dwarfs China in water usage. Fracking, as many know, is

Thanks so much to The Seattle Times for its series this week on climate change [“Losing ground: The struggle to reduce CO2,” News, May 3]. This subject years ago moved from a hypothesis to a valid scientific theory, driven by facts and data. We, the human race, now find ourselves faced with some very…

Despite the United State’s avowed desire to reduce CO2 emissions, we are both an enabler of ourselves, and especially China. [“China's coal solution has carbon downside across globe," News, May 4]. Despite the rhetoric, we are already a net exporter of petroleum, and aspire to be major exporters of liquefied natural gas and coal….

I’m sure many people breathed a sigh of relief when they read the guest column on climate change [“The rhetoric of catastrophe around climate change,” Opinion, April 27]. It reinforces the belief that someone will figure out a solution at some point in the future, the problem really isn’t that bad and we can adapt….